Full Set Flashcards
Does the crime have to have occurred in the state seeking to exercise jurisdiction?
There must be some connection. Whole crime or part of the crime occurred inside the state. Conduct outside the state that involved an attempt to commit a crime inside the state. If a conspiracy to commit a crime w/ an overt act occurred within the state.
Actus Reus
physical act (can be speech)
voluntary (motor control over the act)
omission (failure to comply with legal duty, special relationship, voluntarily assuming a duty of care then casting aside, caused danger and fail to prevent harm)
Mens Rea
4 states of mind: Specific Intent Malice General Intent Strict Liability
Specific Intent definition
Mens Rea
committed act for the purpose of causing specific result
*if you see a statute on MBE w/ “intent” in language it’s probably a specific intent
Specific Intent Crimes under CL (FIAT)
First-degree murder
Inchoate (conspiracy, attempt, & solicitation)
Assault w/ attempt to commit a battery
Theft (larceny, embezzlement, forgery, burglary, robbery)
Malice Crimes
murder
arson
reckless disregard of high risk of harm occurring
General Intent Crimes
catch all category
D intends to commit an act that is unlawful (doesn’t need to be aware of legal ramifications)
knowingly, recklessly, or negligently
MBE will test on murder/manslaughter, battery & rape
Transferred Intent Doctrine
transfer specific intent
vicarious liability - high level officials have ordered/authorized or tolerated the act
merger
can’t be committed of two crimes that merge into one
(1) lesser-included offenses
(2) merger of inchoate & completed offense
conspiracy and substantive offenses do not merge
Principal
D whose acts or omissions form the actus reus
Accomplices
intent of assisting the principal
L for both the planned crime & any other crimes that occur in the course of the criminal act, as long as they are foreseeable
L even if principal can’t be convicted
Accessories after the fact
people who assist D only after the crime
separate offense - harboring fugitive or obstruction of justice
aiders/abettors & conspiracy
if there was an agreement & overt act (in furtherance)
When is mens rea negated?
mistake, insanity & intoxication
Mistake of Law
ignorance of the law is no excuse unless
- reliance on high-level gov’t interpretations of the law
- lack of notice
- goes to an element of specific intent
Mistake of Fact
differ based on kind of mens rea
Mistake of fact - strict liability
mistake of fact is never a defense
mistake of fact - general intent
if mistake is reasonable and goes to the criminal intent
mistake of fact - specific intent
D actually held the mistaken belief, whether it was reasonable or unreasonable
Insanity as a defense to mens rea 4 tests
- M’Naghten
- irresistible impulse
- Durham rule
- MPC
M’Nagten insanity defense
D didn’t know the nature or didn’t know it was wrong
Irresistable impulse insanity defense
D’s mental defect does not all him to control himself
Durham rule insanity defense
d would not have committed the crime but for mental disease or defect
MPC insanity defense
did not have substantial capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of his acts or to conform his conduct to law
Intoxication defense to crime
specific intent - either voluntary or involuntary if couldn’t maintain state of mind
general intent - can only use involuntary intoxication as defense
Conspiracy definition
inchoate crime
- explicit agreement
- between 2+
- to commit unlawful act (furthers)
(4) . modern definition requires an overt act
only D charged must have actually agreed (others can be undercover)
Conspiracy additions
scope - can be convict of both conspiracy and the crimes
hub & spoke
Defense to conspiracy
at CL it is impossible
federal rule - withdrawal before an overt act by communicating intention to withdraw to other conspirators or by informing law enforcement
MPC - conspirator who tries to thwart crime can withdraw after overt act
attempt
specific intent crime (even if attempted crime is only general intent crime)
- intent to commit particular act
- taking substantial step towards perpetrating
defenses to attempt
same as other specific intent crimes - mistake of law, mistake of fact
solicitation
occurs when an individual invites, requests or commands another person to commit a crime
homicide definition & elements
killing of a living human being by another human being
- actual causation (but for)
- proximate causation (foreseeable)
types of homicide
first degree murder
common law murder
manslaughter
first degree murder
specific intent crime
common law murder
(most murders on MBE will be CL)
not a specific intent crime
- unlawful killing
- w/ malice aforethougt
kinds of malice
- intent to kill, need not be premeditate
- intent to inflict serious bodily harm
- abandon and malignant heart - cavalier disregard for human life and death resulted (must know conduct is really risky, but needn’t have intent regarding the outcome of his actions)
- felony murder - during commission of a dangerous felony (BARRK) & must have some resisting the felony (deaths caused by other felonies get misdemeanor manslaughter)
BARRK
dangerous felonies
Burglary Arson Robbery Rape Kidnapping
involuntary manslaughter
criminally N killing, or killing during crime other than BAARK
larceny
specific intent crime
- taking
- another’s property
- w/o consent (not w/ fraud or force)
- with intent to deprive him of it permanently
if you intend to give it back it’s not larceny
embezzlement
specific intent crime
variation on larceny - begins with consent, then converts property to his own use
false pretenese
specific intent crime
variation on larceny - obtains title through deception
“catch me if you can”
MPC effect on larceny (& larceny type crimes)
under MPC they are treated as a single statutory crime of theft (just note whether you need to go through all the elements or not)
robbery
specific intent crime
CL - larceny + assault
- taking
- another’s property
- w/o consent (not w/ fraud or force)
- with intent to deprive him of it permanently
- in their presence
- physical violence of fear of imminent physical harm
extorition
specific intent crime
variation on larceny - threats of future harm
burglary
specific intent crime
CL:
- breaking
- entering
- the dwelling
- of another
- at night
- specific intent to commit a felony once inside
can now occur at places besides residences and during the day
battery
general intent crime
- unlawful
- application of force
- to another person
- causes bodily harm OR
- offensive touching
assault forms
attempted battery - specific intent
intentionally placing another in the fear of imminent bodily harm - general intent
rape
CL:
- unlawful
- sexual intercourse
- with a female
- against her will by force or threat of force
- general intent
usu. now does not have to be a woman or threat of force
statutory rape
regulatory morals offense, so mistake of fact is irrelevant
kidnapping
- unlawful
- confinement of another
- against their will
- by moving or hiding victim
arson (frequently tested)
- malice
- burning (no damage necessary)
- another’s
- property
perjury
willful act of falsely promising to tell the truth about a material matter
subornation of perjury - paying someone to falsely testify
bribery
CL - corrupt payment of something of value for purposes of influencing an official in his duties
Modern - allows bribery to be prosecuted even if the person being bribed isn’t a public official
Defenses (list)
- intoxication
- insanity
- mistake of fact
- self-defense
- defense of others
- defense of property
- duress
- necessity
self defense/defense of others as defense
deadly force: intended or likely to cause death or serious injury
nondeadly force: involves force that is not likely to cause death or serious injury
reasonable person standard
majority rule does not require retreat
defense of property as defense
nondeadly force only
duress as defense
threat by 3rd party and reasonably believed that the only way to avoid death or injury
no good for intentional murder
necessity as defense
available in response to natural forces; i.e., its the lesser of two evils
